V. I.

Lenin

We know that the great Chinese Republic, established at the cost of
such sacrifice by progressive democrats among the Asian masses, recently
encountered very grave financial difficulties. The six “Great” Powers,
which are considered civilised nations, but which in reality follow the
most reactionary policies, formed a financial consortium which suspended
the granting of a loan to China.

The point is that the Chinese revolution did not evoke among the
European bourgeoisie any enthusiasm for freedom and democracy—only the
proletariat can entertain that feeling, which is alien to the knights of
profit; it gave rise to the urge to plunder China, partition her
and take away some of her territories. This “consortium” of the six
Powers (Britain, France, Russia, Germany, Japan and the United States) was
trying to make China bankrupt in order to weaken and undermine the
republic.

The collapse of this reactionary consortium is a big success
for the young republic, which enjoys the sympathy of the working masses the
world over. The President of the United States has announced that his
government will no longer support the consortium and will officially
recognise the Republic of China in the near future. The American
banks have now left the consortium, and America will give China
much-needed financial support, opening the Chinese market to American
capital and thereby facilitating the introduction, of reforms in China.

Influenced by America, Japan has also changed her policy towards
China. At first, Japan would not even allow Sun Yat-sen to enter the
country. Now the visit has taken place, and all Japanese democrats
enthusiastically welcome an alliance with republican China; the conclusion of that alliance is
now on the order of the day. The Japanese bourgeoisie, like the American,
has come to realise that it stands to profit more from a policy of peace
with China than from a policy of plundering and partitioning the Chinese
Republic.

The collapse of the robber consortium is, of course, a defeat of no
mean importance for Russia’s reactionary foreign policy.

---
Notes: